Advice if possible (forced sale)

BrassicWoman

Let's say the debate drags the process out for another 6 months.

Is it worth the cost to my mental heath, of around £500 a month, for this not to be over?

For me personally - no. Freedom is priceless.

Lewie

Yes. I've mentioned several times that the leaver is willing to compromise and to leave all goods they have bought without asking for recompense.
I can't put everything on here but the list is long as far as compromises are concerned.
There is only a certain point that you can compromise to unless you already have funds to move forward in life.
The leaver can't just walk away and feel 'free' if they are left homeless


In my last message I also stated, 
My original reason for asking wasn't to do with the deposit etc, just what/how to go about the next step
The buyer is apparently still 'sorting out finances' but at the moment that needs taking with a pinch of salt
The ball still needs to be rolling just in case
Cheers

I'm not asking what may or may not happen along the way

I have replied to others out of courtesy but still get "This might happen that might happen" etc
My original post stated 

Apparently the courts would expect mediation first? At around £150 per hour!!! Ludicrous
That aside, anyone gone through this?
Easiest next step? Letter? Whatever?
Cheers

The bit in bold was the question.
Anything else would be dealt with as it rears its head
Hopefully the buyer is serious, will sort their finances and it will be over
But it's no use sitting back in the meantime, there needs to be a plan B because their plan may be to hold out and hope the leaver goes away, hence the question in bold.
Cheers

_Penny_Dreadful

Lewie said:

Yes. I've mentioned several times that the leaver is willing to compromise and to leave all goods they have bought without asking for recompense.
I can't put everything on here but the list is long as far as compromises are concerned.
There is only a certain point that you can compromise to unless you already have funds to move forward in life.
The leaver can't just walk away and feel 'free' if they are left homeless


In my last message I also stated, 
My original reason for asking wasn't to do with the deposit etc, just what/how to go about the next step
The buyer is apparently still 'sorting out finances' but at the moment that needs taking with a pinch of salt
The ball still needs to be rolling just in case
Cheers

I'm not asking what may or may not happen along the way

I have replied to others out of courtesy but still get "This might happen that might happen" etc
My original post stated 

Apparently the courts would expect mediation first? At around £150 per hour!!! Ludicrous
That aside, anyone gone through this?
Easiest next step? Letter? Whatever?
Cheers

The bit in bold was the question.
Anything else would be dealt with as it rears its head
Hopefully the buyer is serious, will sort their finances and it will be over
But it's no use sitting back in the meantime, there needs to be a plan B because their plan may be to hold out and hope the leaver goes away, hence the question in bold.
Cheers

The easiest next step is for the Leaver to accept the deal on the table. That deal being receiving the full deposit back, leaving behind what are now second hand furniture and white goods, and accepting the price on the table. However, it does not sound like the Leaver wants to do this and begrudges paying for mediation which would be the step after refusing the offer on the table leaving the Leaver at an impasse. What does the Leaver think sending a letter will achieve? 

The Leaver could consult a solicitor specialising in TOLATA cases as suggested earlier and that would give the Leaver an idea of the legal costs involved which I reckon will easily be in the same region as the £2500 to £5000 being quibbled over. The solicitor could also confirm that with the amount being disputed that an TOLATA case would be as fruitless as a bunch of laypersons on the internet think. 

Lewie

PD
And your type of reply is why I didn't answer you last time.
You read and interpret as you see fit.

Post #4 
They are already the one giving up their job, pets, household goods etc.

That, if you read it correctly states that they are willing to leave their 'second hand furniture and white goods'.

The amount the buyer is trying to knock off would cost the seller £2,500-£5,000 and yes, the seller, again, would, if push came to shove, walk away accepting that loss.

That's the paragraph that shows the leaver is willing to take up to a £5,000 loss.
I have no idea where you get the notion that they are not willing to take the offer.
Please show where that is stated.

As for mediation, at no point did I state that the leaver begrudges paying for mediation, again if you read the post correctly you will see that it was me that stated the cost of mediation was ludicrous.

Again, from post #4
Apparently the courts would expect mediation first? At around £150 per hour!!! Ludicrous

Where on Earth did you get the notion that the leaver had stated that they begrudge paying for mediation?

So, for clarity, the leaver is willing to take the offer on the table if the buyer would actually put it there to be taken.
I think the cost of mediation is ludicrous, not the leaver, as you, for some reason, stated.
Again, the reason for the initial post was where to go next.

From post #1
That aside, anyone gone through this?
Easiest next step? Letter? Whatever?

That aside means, putting that aside, as in all that went previously. It was purely for background information which posts 2 & 3 attempted to address.
And I thank them. 

Exodi

I can probably share a little wisdom on this as I went through a very similar situation a few years ago. Firstly, I personally wouldn't use an estate agents valuation (though I can understand why the person receiving cash would be extremely keen to do so). In my experience they generally overstate values. In my situation we used the valuation provided by the mortgage lender (if I logged into mortgage manager, it would tell me their specific valuation of the property). This was lower than the estate agent valuations (by it's nature, it is more cautious) but it is also logical to use this amount as it is the objective value that will be used in the further advance application (which is usually the way someone buys someone out). Of course you can also negotiate the price between the two, but FWIW I would feel hard done by being expected to buy out at the estate agents valuation.

Actually probably before that, can they definitely do the buy out on their own? It's pretty difficult for most people on average or even above average incomes, I'd expect most people don't meet affordability so are forced to sell. It would be disappointing if you spend months arguing the figure then come to realise they can't secure the lending regardless.

It is fortunate that the buyer has agreed to forfeit the deposit. I appreciate the circumstances (they didn't pay towards the deposit) but it was very reckless and short-sighted to buy as joint tenants and the leaver could have potentially been hung out to dry for this. One thing I would say, is if the house price is expected to be less than you purchased for, then I don't think it is unreasonable for the deposit to also take part of this hit (I don't think it would be fair, for example, to return the deposit whole and then suggest that the remaining equity that was to be split is mostly wiped out by depreciation).

Regarding goods in the house, you have to be realistic, as firstly the goods are worth less now than they were purchased for, but also that the leaver ultimately probably doesn't want to take them with them. You don't want to end up in a game of chicken where the buyer says "OK fine, take the oven, washing machine, sofa set, dining table, beds, etc" knowing that the leaver realistically can't moving into a rental. Forfeiting these items I think is a good gesture by the leaver.

Personally I can see why the buyer might be wanting to drag their heels and pay less than estate agent valuation as above, however on your comment "It's looking like a forced sale" it definitely shouldn't and I find this comment a bit naive. For some reason, in all walks of life (this forum is no exception) people are very flippant and casual about resorting to court when it should remain as the absolute last resort. Yet in reality - we can't agree a price during an argument? I'll see you in court! This would be monumentally stupid by both of them, and they can expect the relatively small difference in their positions to be dwarfed by the legal costs. To be honest it's frustrating to see this so prematurely suggested during a disagreement. They just need to keep having difficult conversations and keep moving towards each other.

One thing I would say is irrelevant of what's right, what's wrong, etc in my situation I ignored 'the principle' and made a buyout offer well above would most people would consider fair or reasonable. I could not bear being stuck in the situation living with my ex, unable to move on with my life. By most calculations I overpaid by at least £8k to get it done (which includes some 'grit your teeth' circumstances, including paying half of the mortgage overpayments I'd solely made from my own savings and paying them for furniture I had purchased, and this was on top of the reason for the breakup being that she had cheated on me). But I'm not one for drama and I would probably still be living with her many years on, arguing over a few thousand pounds if I hadn't bit the bullet (and I'm glad I did because fast forward a few years and I'm now married and we're expecting our first child this year!)

Life is definitely too short (and it's certainly not fair), but the power is in both their hands to move forward. As you said, they agreed to buy the other party out, the disagreement seems to be on the value, and for some of the reasons above, I don't think their concerns about the estate agent valuation are totally unreasonable.

Lewie

Thanks Exodi
The valuation was what they both agreed to do. Neither was thinking of getting the better over the other.
I agree, they can over value but then I've seen many that have had offers over the asking price, so swings and...
That said, as stated, the leaver will go down from the valuation up to £10,000 (£5,000 each)

As stated, the leaver is still waiting for the answer regarding buy out.

Reckless to not state to your (supposed) forever love that if you split they want it all back?
I'm not sure that's a good starting point for a relationship, but hey, I guess you have to account for anything.
Like I stated in a previous reply

 it shouldn't just be up to the deposit payer to obtain a 'deed of trust'.
It should work both ways.
A deposit payer needs to get a declaration that the other party agrees they have no claim on the deposit.
Similarly, the 'receiver' should need to obtain a declaration that the deposit payer waives any claim to the deposit.
If neither declaration exists, the deposit payer is reimbursed fully.
A simple solution that would avoid mistakes or confusion, but hey, if legal made things simple...

That way there would be no need to broach the subject at the beginning of life together.
And no, there is enough equity to cover the deposit and more.

Goods in the house, the leaver has options to freely store them so in reality it would save them a couple of grand when starting again, but they just want out and are willing to forfeit them.

Forced sale, not naive, realistic. If you read the thread you will see the last thing that the leaver wants is a forced sale.
What other choice is there if the buyer won't/can't buy out and won't put the house on the market?
In fact, reading the rest of that paragraph I'll leave it there, you clearly haven't read the thread properly.
It irritates me when someone gives 'advice' but doesn't care to look at what advice has been asked for.
But thanks for your time anyway

Post #7
 All of that part, the house price, deposit etc isn't an issue
It's what to do now to get the ball rolling
The buyer could just be waiting to see if the leaver will crumble
Best to get something moving than wait until the last minute

Post #9
My original reason for asking wasn't to do with the deposit etc, just what/how to go about the next step
The buyer is apparently still 'sorting out finances' but at the moment that needs taking with a pinch of salt
The ball still needs to be rolling just in case

Post above yours
That aside, anyone gone through this?
Easiest next step? Letter? Whatever?
That aside means, putting that aside, as in all that went previously. It was purely for background information which posts 2 & 3 attempted to address.
And I thank them.

BrassicWoman

Lewie, this is the internet, and you cannot control how people will respond to points on a public forum.

I sense your frustration at not getting exactly what you need; I am afraid that is the downside of not having paid for advice. People do have a lot of life experience, and they like to share it. Sometimes on my own threads, points I had not considered have been raised, and I have found them very helpful.

It is fine to ignore whatever you disagree with, no one will judge you for it. Do ignore my post if it offends, I fully expect that to happen sometimes.

Note that legal aid is available for some specific kinds of mediation if people are on low incomes. Otherwise, as with everything, payment is due for services rendered. I can only suggest qualifying as a mediator if you find the wages to be offensively high, and offer your services pro bono.

The real nub of the question seems to be "how can the remainer be made to behave ethically as well as legally?" 

Ethics is a bit of a moving feast, and is near impossible to enforce unless a law has been broken. I do not believe the answer you seek exists.

You do also seem very emotionally invested; I assume one of the parties means a considerable amount to you. This makes impartiality tricky, of course. But I am sure they are glad to have you looking out for them. Ultimately, they will decide what the value of a clean break is to them.

Exodi

Are you the leaver by chance?

In any case, it's clear you're extremely invested in this, sorry if my post offended you. 

Lewie said:

Reckless to not state to your (supposed) forever love that if you split they want it all back?
I'm not sure that's a good starting point for a relationship, but hey, I guess you have to account for anything.

I know you disagree (and I can understand it's going to be difficult to read as I suspect you're the leaver) but yes, it is totally reckless for one party to bring in a significant deposit and then take no steps to protect it. The "(supposed)" comment is just a daft thing to add; no one gets together planning to break up, yet break ups happen all the time. Your thread is a literal example of this.

The tired "so you're planning to break up?" arguments or it not being a "good starting point for a relationship" have been made a thousand times over on this forum. These people probably don't stay to read the countless threads of people being stung by the consequences of their naivety (and you/the leaver may avoid being one of them by the skin of your teeth), or the furious parents seeing a massive gift to their child being taken by an ex. If a couple is not able to have these sensitive conversations, they should not be buying a house together. If one partner is happy to share the deposit in the event of a break-up, by all means own the house as joint tenants. We must be emotionally mature enough to realise that the vast majority of relationships do not last forever, but what's great is if your relationship does stand the test of time, then you will never need to use the deed of trust.

Lewie said:

 it shouldn't just be up to the deposit payer to obtain a 'deed of trust'.
It should work both ways.
A deposit payer needs to get a declaration that the other party agrees they have no claim on the deposit.
Similarly, the 'receiver' should need to obtain a declaration that the deposit payer waives any claim to the deposit.
If neither declaration exists, the deposit payer is reimbursed fully.
A simple solution that would avoid mistakes or confusion, but hey, if legal made things simple...

With respect, have you ever owned as tenants in common and had a deed of trust drafted as I find your comments on it quite confusing?

Firstly it's not just up to the 'deposit payer' to obtain a deed of trust? There's nothing that says the party putting down the most money is obligated to pay the solicitors fees or for the additional cost for a deed of trust. My wife and I split all the conveyancing costs 50:50 (not that it's relevant anymore but she was not resentful about signing a deed of trust, she was greatly appreciative that my contribution enabled us to buy a house together where we otherwise would not have been able to do so). Likewise it does work both ways, the conveyancer works for you both, you both get to decide what gets put in the deed of trust and you both need to agree and sign it.

I have had 3 different deed of trusts in my life and they were each between 3-8 pages. Respectfully your points above are a tad simplistic/naive (which is why I ask if you've ever drafted one) - e.g. 'the deposit' is not a clear cut thing and needs defining (does it include legal costs/surveys/etc?). Is it a fixed amount or a percentage (some people might want their contribution to increase with the value of the house)? Does it work for all scenarios (e.g. if the house price decreases, will the deposit amount decrease or is the deposit protected)? What if one of you pays more towards the mortgage? etc.

Lots of things to think about and I don't think that people are 'accidently' purchasing as joint tenants (and if they are they should be complaining to their conveyancers). At least in your/the leavers' situation, the type of ownership was not because of a 'mistake or confusion' it was because you believe that it's 'not a good starting point for a relationship'.

Lewie said:

Forced sale, not naive, realistic. 
<snip>
It irritates me when someone gives 'advice' but doesn't care to look at what advice has been asked for.
But thanks for your time anyway

It's disappointing to be dismissed for disagreeing, especially having been through a very similar scenario in the past, but I will leave to hopefully allow more people to post that agree with you.

Please could you update the thread though and let us know if you/they do end up going down the route of forcing a sale?

Lewie

Yo Exodi.
Just back on here about another issue and have only just seen your reply!
I often don't get notifications.
For clarification, no, I'm not the leaver.
If I was I would have turned up at the house at random times and disrupted the buyers rent free cosy lifestyle.
And no, your post didn't offend me. I don't mind about a difference of opinion. Yours was one of the more helpful/balanced replies.
The 'irritation' comes from people not reading posts or not replying to the question asked.
Such as when you suggested it was naive to state that it is looking like a forced sale when every avenue (apart from walking away) has been suggested. If the buyer won't put the house on the market, move out, or compromise, what else is there to do?
Perhaps you didn't realise just how much had been done before I posted, I did only do it in brief format.
Believe me, it would be great for the leaver if this was all over tomorrow, but it just isn't going to happen.
They've also discovered the extortionate rates of the legal profession. 
They're looking at using a direct access barrister now to cut out the solicitor/barrister double act.
Good idea?

That aside, it's still ongoing.
The leaver went to mediation, then obviously the other party gets an invite.
The buyer ignored it.
The leaver has compromised further regarding the buy out figure.
The buyer refuses to accept or even give a figure of their own.
Here in lies the frustration. There can be no negotiation if only one party is playing ball.
Even if they came up with £1.50, at least there would be a figure to debate.
The latest offer was met with, can I have a breakdown of how you got that figure.
They already have the same breakdown from other figures posed earlier so they are clearly continuing to play for time, likely hoping the leaver will walk away.
The buyer has also now stated they won't give back 'their half' (their words not mine) of the deposit.
The leaver is now waiting for a meeting with a barrister to discuss the chances in court of 

1. A forced sale. Very likely.

2. A claim for occupation rent.

3. A request that the buyer pays 'their half' of the deposit based on written evidence that they see it as 'their half'
A possibility as apparently courts are increasingly recognising "constructive trust".

4. A request for all costs incurred due to the leaver being forced down the route of court due to the buyer being uncooperative, especially not attending mediation, which I believe the courts generally frown upon.

So that's where we are, obviously in a nutshell. 

BTW, my suggestion regarding the deposit was purely based on the deposit.
At the moment the deposit has to be ringfenced.
My point is, if it isn't then it should be assumed that it is, unless stated otherwise.
All other issues could be sorted out separately.
Yes, you did it correct, many don't, sometimes due to a misunderstanding, sometimes naivety, sometimes love!
Just my opinion.

TripleH

Can the leaver not rent out a room in their house?

Or let a really obnoxious odourless friend live there rent free?

This is petty I admit, but it might ne easier to make the person staying life so uncomfortable they have an incentive to end this mess in a prompter fashion.